war crimes
Parallels of Bosnia situation with Kosovo
By Jane Cutter, International Action Center-Ann Arbor
I have been asked to draw out some of the parallels between the recent and continuing criminal US/NATO war in Kosovo and the earlier situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The parallels are numerous. In the time available to me, I hope to highlight some of the key underlying similarities between the two situations, in such a way that we can strengthen our anti-war analysis. Both the Bosnia intervention and The recent 78 day criminal bombing campaign against Yugoslavia and the current military occupation by US NATO forces are two of several phases in the drive to dismember Yugoslavia and re-colonize this strategic region of the world. This project has been underway since at least the 1980Us, when Yugoslavia became indebted to western banks as it introduced "market reforms" into the publicly owned economy. AS early as 1984, a secret US security document stated that US policy towards Yugoslavia would be to encourage "a market oriented Yugoslav economic structure."
In 1990, however, Serbia rejected the move to privatization, which was having devastating consequences on the standard of living. The response to this roadblock against privatization was the passage of foreign appropriations law 101-513 in 1990, as well as economic sanctions from the European nations. This outside economic interference encouraged secessionist movements, and directly gave aid to them, leading to the series of " civil" wars, the latest of which was centered in Kosovo. All along the goal of the western imperialist powers, above all the US and Germany has been to privatize Yugoslavia's state run industries, make them answerable first and foremost to the interests of US and European banks and subject Yugoslavian workers of all nationalities to the level of exploitation found in the sweatshops of free enterprise zones in developing nations.
Taking as our premise the colonialist aim of these interventions, let us examine some of the parallels between the Bosnian and the Kosovo interventions. Starting with the surface level, the level of propaganda and media spin, there is the demonization of the Serbian people. In both the Bosnia and Kosovo conflicts, while we are aware of the role of outside economic interference in stimulating the civil conflicts, the media portrayed the situation as one of "age old ethnic hatreds." Furthermore, in what we know were complex multifaceted conflicts, one ethnic group, the Serbs, have been portrayed as actual Nazis, perpetrators of horrendous atrocities, while other groups are seen as blameless victims My point here is not to refute in detail the demonizing accusations, but to highlight its role in the colonialist project. First of all, if the US government just came out and said "We intend to colonize Yugoslavia and we will spend billions of your tax dollars to do so, in order that banks and corporations can rake in huge profits" public support would be slim. It must be painted as a humanitarian mission. The colonialist part of the mission is masked in a quasi-racist sub-text about how "these people" are unable to manage their own affairs and need "our" "assistance" to straighten things out, never mind the role that the would-be humanitarians have played in the creating the crisis in the first place.
However, there are a few places where the imperialists have came right out and stated there intentions regarding first Bosnia and now Kosovo. We can read it in the fine print o the Dayton accords and the Rambouillet accords.
The Rambouillet accords were the prelude, to the Kosovo intervention. The accord was deliberately designed such that Yugoslavia would reject it. Media sources have indicated that Madeline Albright advocated this strategy of issuing an unacceptable ultimatum to Yugoslavia regarding Kosovo, in order to provide a pretext for a bombing campaign. Albright is alleged to have said, "They need a little bombing." Compare this to the remark made by Lawrence Eagleburger in 1994, in which he said the Balkans needed a present day "congress of Berlin" controlled by the US NATO powers--to redraw the map, and tell Yugoslavia that if they didn’t accept this, "We’re collectively going to kick the shit out of you. "
Dayton was forced down the throats of the Balkan peoples, (following some so-called strategic air strikes) with the threat of a prolonged bombing campaign. When Rambouillet was rejected, a devastating bombing campaign that targeted civilian infrastructure ensued. Both these documents represent colonialist ultimate backed up with the greatest military power on earth.
What are the provisions of these documents (one can hardly call them agreements) Dayton created a constitution for Bosnia, which appointed a non-Bosnian, former Swedish prime minister Carl Bildt as the High Representative e in charge of civilian matters, with the power to overrule the Bosnian Federation and Rebublica Srpska’s governments. He has "final authority" according the document. A commissioner of police was appointed to preside over an international police force. The Economic policy is in the hands of foreign institutions as well, with the IMF empowered to appoint the first governor of the Bosnian Central Bank, who can not be a citizen of Bosnia, Herzegovina or any neighboring state. Is this democracy, to have non-elected foreign leaders in charge of your country? Or is it colonialism?
Compare these arrangements to those proposed in the Rambouillet accords: Chapter 4a article I: the economy shall function according to free market principles! They came right out and said it! In a parallel role to the High Representative in Bosnia, Rambouillet called for a CIM Chief of the Implementation Mission, to be appointed by the EU nations-who would have "final authority" in interpretation of civilian aspects of the agreement. In military matters, the NATO commander would have final authority. Additionally, Rambouillet would have allowed NATO forces unfettered access to all of Yugoslavia, with all costs for such access to be paid by Yugoslavia.
Turning back to Bosnia and the Dayton accords--That colonialist arrangement was and continues to be backed up by military occupation forces in Bosnia. The task force in Bosnia is about 60,000 strong, with support forces in near by countries, the personnel involved reach the figure of about 150,000. According to Dayton, the US troops involved in this operation were supposed to return home after one year, in 1996. In 1996, Clinton extended their stay for 2 more years. As you well know, they are still there, how long will they remain? The Kosovo parallel here is the 50,000 occupying troops in that province, who are actually overseeing the cleansing of 70,000 Serbs from their homes by the KLA. How long will they remain? At what cost in human life and suffering to the peoples of the region and to the workers of the US and NATO countries, who are footing the bill? Let us hold the US and NATO accountable for their war crimes against the peoples of Yugoslavia and other nations, let us organize and educate our brothers and sisters in the workplaces and schools and communities to say "Never again! Not in our name."
Commission of Inquiry
c/o International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@iacenter.org
http://www.iacenter.org
phone: 212 633-6646
fax: 212 633-2889
